Ethics - Inherent or God-Given?

[PotrM]

Hello all
There are two issues keeping me from mainstream religion, and I'm earnestly looking to reconcile my beliefs.

One is my post of yesterday, "God and Time". Sadly no answers yet.

The other is to do with ethics. We as people have our own ingrained sense of ethics - while it varies from person to person and between cultures, we can agree on some things - needless death is bad. Torturing children is bad. Etc.

However, that inherent code differs sometimes from the actions of God or His agents, throughout all Abrahamic religions that I can see (moreso, the further back in time you go). Look no further than the vaporisation of Sodom - trade Sodom for Hiroshima and it's bordering on a war crime by 21st century sensibilities.

So my question is: if via the scriptures God tells you to do something you find inherently wrong (such as to kill someone without personal investment), is that correct by definition? After all, our inbuilt moral code has to have come from somewhere... if not God, then where? (And if you say Satan, then why would Satan encourage welfare... especially at the level that it's inherent to all {most} of us?)

 

[columbus]

You and I disagree on whether ethics are inherent. I don't think they are. I think inherent behavior patterns are better termed instinct. Ethics are learned, not inherent.
They seem often to be inherent because so many people quickly start picking up the basics. Play nicely and you'll have more fun. Do what your parents tell you and things go better. Most people keep learning and fleshing out their ethics into adulthood.

What is inherent are the instincts we're born with. Some are good, but many aren't. Whether God, or evolution (which is what I believe) the tendencies to fight, steal, and screw are inherent. They are well honed to spread our genes(which is why think them a product of evolution), but bad for living a satisfying life. That tendency to sabotage happiness is what makes them immoral.

Primitive people simply didn't know as much. The ancient Israelites, for instance, did not know that genocide was immoral. Their primitive tribal ethics only applied to other members and not even always then. So that's why they bragged about what are now considered crimes against humanity.

Of course, in their turn they were rolled over by the Assyrians and Chaldeans and Romans and Christians and... well... now they're on top again and it bites to be Palestinian.

Tom

 

[metis]

Since ethics cross-culturally are quite variable, I personally think it's obvious that at least the details of morality are inherent. However, some scientists do believe that we may have what some call a "god gene", namely a natural tendency towards religion, and that I do believe may be logically correct even though we have no direct evidence of such.

 

[columbus]

Since ethics cross-culturally are quite variable, I personally think it's obvious that at least the details of morality are inherent.

Why?
The differences in morality, even amongst people similar in culture and time, proves to me that ethics are not inherent. Peoples ethics and morality are whatever they learned.

Tom

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The other is to do with ethics. We as people have our own ingrained sense of ethics - while it varies from person to person and between cultures, we can agree on some things - needless death is bad. Torturing children is bad. Etc.

Not everyone agrees death is bad, torturing children is bad, etc. It's a false assumption. In truth, most people do, and it's so uncommon to find a person who doesn't that it might seem like they don't exist. But there are actually people who would look at those things and be indifferent, as well as people who would do those things for what they see as the greater good. I will honestly say neither of those things are bad to me unless it involves someone I care about, and I could care less about my public image being destroyed by that fact.

Not to mention, even if all were to agree on one moral principle, it doesn't say anything about its reality. An opinion is still an opinion even if all people share it.

However, that inherent code differs sometimes from the actions of God or His agents, throughout all Abrahamic religions that I can see (moreso, the further back in time you go). Look no further than the vaporisation of Sodom - trade Sodom for Hiroshima and it's bordering on a war crime by 21st century sensibilities.

That's because through the ages of time humans either accomplished their goals as a culture, or they died before they could and their goals were never met or passed on. Each civilization in history had different things in mind when they constructed rules, there is no one common image of society. Morality differs when goals differ, and for the goals that have been fulfilled the moral codes are no longer needed. For the goals that have been buried in the sands of time the moral codes are buried with it.

So it's unfair to criticize the morality of another culture of another time, because we'd be judging from our society's commonly shared ethics which are totally irrelevant to them.

So my question is: if via the scriptures God tells you to do something you find inherently wrong (such as to kill someone without personal investment), is that correct by definition? After all, our inbuilt moral code has to have come from somewhere... if not God, then where? (And if you say Satan, then why would Satan encourage welfare... especially at the level that it's inherent to all {most} of us?)

It comes from in our heads. If you aren't comfortable with the rules, you either abide them and feel guilty about it, or you ignore the rules that aren't on your moral standards and live in an honest perspective.

 

[PotrM]

@The Sum of Awe
Much of what you say makes a lot of sense, thank you. I'm guessing you are arguing from a position of moral relativism, which I can understand.

My upbringing was much aligned with the position you espouse, so I can certainly understand it. But from what I've seen, religious families seem to be closer, and happier. Meanwhile I've watched my mother try to take her life twice, all why saying that we control out destiny.
I suppose I was just praying - so to speak - for some kind of illusion to see us through. But it's better to face reality head on. Thank you, and I mean that. We'll be stronger in the long run for it.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I think ethics are learned based on culture and upbrining. To me, there doesn't seem to be anything to suggest that they're above human limitations, or absolute, or qnything of the sort.

 

[Sees]

I think ethics are learned based on culture and upbrining. To me, there doesn't seem to be anything to suggest that they're above human limitations, or absolute, or qnything of the sort.

Woah, he's back!

 

[Sunstone]

To me, ethics seem a lot like tool use. In humans, tool use is inherent, rooted in our DNA. But there are both cultural and individual variations to their use.

In a similar manner, ethics seem to me to be inherent, rooted in our DNA, but with cultural and individual variations.